Lib Dems Obsession With Personal Allowance

[The Knimbies who say No]

So our total liabilities are 173% of GDP, is that really such a big deal?

GDP is an almost meaningless stat, but if we assume it is somehow accurate and meaningful then it would only take less than 2 years GDP to write off everything, so that would be a 10% rise in taxes for 20 years, or a 20% rise for 10 years

In the 1980s we has a 23% tax cut, so all they have to do is reverse that. 50% >> 60%

In reality no-one is likely to reduce liabilities to zero, but they might go half way 50% >> 55%

'A 10% rise' makes it sound like everyone pays 10% more tax, but you mean 10% of GDP more between everyone for 20 years. 10% of GDP in tax means around £400/month in tax rises for everyone- man, woman or child. Spread between the 30 million households, that's an extra £10k per year in taxes.

Edit and don't forget that to balance the budget we'll need another £120Bn, another £300/month/household at current spending levels.

Edited March 14, 2014 by The Knimbies who say no

[Executive Sadman]

How on earth can you "introduce a living wage"?

Re-animate the dead and shove some money into their decomposing fists?!

[(Blizzard)]

Taxes are destroying the economy.

Not taxes, rents. Rent is just a private sector tax, and tax a state administered rent.

Edited March 15, 2014 by (Blizzard)

[Jack's Creation]

Not taxes, rents. Rent is just a private sector tax, and tax a state administered rent.

For it to be equivalent, both would be optional.

[crashmonitor]

Apparently 5 million workers don't pay income tax. The real disincentive to work is housing benefit and all the rest. Meanwhile in raising the thresholds the 5 million poorest will have to pay the price in cuts elsewhere.

http://www.resolutionfoundation.org/blog/2014/mar/11/why-lib-dems-12500-tax-allowance-promise-smaller-p/

Edited March 15, 2014 by crashmonitor

[rh2409]

Call me suspicious, but every time the media mentions companies 'avoiding' paying taxes they only ever mention revenues, not profits. You cant tax what doesnt exist.

If not...well, one of the many 'benefits' of the EU. Free movement of labour AND capital.

Most likely though the media omits, deliberately, the only figure of relevance.

As for council tax. Its capped. Its not going to rise. Instead services will be cut until 100% of your council tax goes to paying off long since retired workers.

You've kind of missed the issue here:

A company like Virgin Trains (for example) pays little tax in the UK as its sales are billed through Virgin Luxembourg whilst its costs are paid by Virgin Trains UK, i.e money it has made in the UK is shunted off to a low tax environment to avoid paying tax in the UK.

Luxembourg is an EU state.

People tell me that I'm slightly Odd....

itsarandomworld

[Executive Sadman]

You've kind of missed the issue here:

A company like Virgin Trains (for example) pays little tax in the UK as its sales are billed through Virgin Luxembourg whilst its costs are paid by Virgin Trains UK, i.e money it has made in the UK is shunted off to a low tax environment to avoid paying tax in the UK.

Luxembourg is an EU state.

People tell me that I'm slightly Odd....

itsarandomworld

Well, like i said, one of the many 'benefits' of the EU. Lots of companies registered in Luxembourg (or Ireland)

Just thought it worth mentioning that the TV never mentions profits, only revenues when reporting these 'tax dodgers' Well yes, billions in revenues and thousands in taxes sounds very little. Not really of any relevance if they are making a loss despite large revenues though is it.

Not having a go at anyone, just the non-info drivel that passes as news nowadays.

[snowflux]

A few years ago they were in favour of replacing even a vague land tax like council tax with yet another tax on productivity, a local income tax.

Frankly I dont think even the Libdems know what they are in favour of.

Theyre the party of localism who want to cede more power to the EU.

Theyre the party of 'science' whilst lobbying for the continuation of barbaric halal practices. Because religious superstition is just so, scientific.

1) The Libdems are indeed in favour of an LVT, and Vince Cable has already been vilified in The Telegraph for saying so.

2) The Libdems are in favour of the principle of subsidiarity, that is, taking decisions at the most appropriate level. Some things can be decided locally; other things, such as fisheries policy, require EU level agreement (since fish don't respect national boundaries).

3) Most animals are stunned before halal or kosher (funny you didn't mention this) slaughter. Pretty much the only difference is that the slaughterman says a quick prayer before killing the animal. Libdems aren't "lobbying for" halal or kosher practices; they merely oppose an unnecessary (from an animal welfare point of view) ban on them.

[Traktion]

For it to be equivalent, both would be optional.

Neither are optional.